Re: ECC point compression trick
 From: Unruh <unruhspam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
 Date: 29 Jun 2006 23:01:49 GMT
clark <clark@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
On 28 Jun 2006 19:46:41 0700, "Tom St Denis" <tomstdenis@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
William L. Bahn wrote:
And still the question stands  is 3 or 4 the negative square
root of 2 mod 7?
Both are. They are also both the positive square roots of 2 under
arithmetic mod 7.
<snip>
I think we're focusing on a nonissue here.
Clearly any standard would have to mandate either a numerical or
deterministic process to determine which is the "positive root". If
the prime is 3 mod 4 then you can use the power rule. That will always
yield the same value. Regardless of who or how you implement the
exponentiation.
Oh well, I guess this is the best we can hope for usenet. Bickering
and fighting over minute details because somehow, somewhere, someone is
"more wrong" then you.
I'm sorry I brought it up.
Not...sorry...enough, beeeeyotch...
Now... En Garde!!!
.
 References:
 ECC point compression trick
 From: Tom St Denis
 Re: ECC point compression trick
 From: Pubkeybreaker
 Re: ECC point compression trick
 From: Tom St Denis
 Re: ECC point compression trick
 From: Pubkeybreaker
 Re: ECC point compression trick
 From: Tom St Denis
 Re: ECC point compression trick
 From: William L. Bahn
 Re: ECC point compression trick
 From: Tom St Denis
 Re: ECC point compression trick
 From: clark
 ECC point compression trick
 Prev by Date: Re: CRC32  as good as 32bit checksums get?
 Next by Date: Re: CRC32  as good as 32bit checksums get?
 Previous by thread: Re: ECC point compression trick
 Next by thread: Re: ECC point compression trick
 Index(es):
Relevant Pages
